Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Megan Murphy is on Joe Rogan

87 replies

miri1985 · 20/08/2021 21:24

Full ep here: open.spotify.com/episode/6yc6AIMf3JqLWygLQJ4Wrg

Short clip:

OP posts:
timeisnotaline · 04/11/2021 23:41

I have also googled her now. She’s an unvaccinated pregnant woman - big black mark, AND She works (worked) in a care home. Huge black mark. While she’s not sure about the transmission impact it’s 1. Really obviously not zero impact and 2. She’s not vaccinated so doing NOTHING to lower that impact, and worked in a care home which are full of vulnerable people. She might not be a rabid antivaxxer (& I did assume that from clymenes statements rather than do my own research) but she’s more than enough ‘my impact on others is irrelevant’ if she’d do that. We’ve all seen the virus rip through care homes and I think stepping through the door while unvaccinated is unconscionable.

NiceGerbil · 04/11/2021 23:49

Not read all but first few posts made me wonder.

With politics for me. I mean yes of course parents area peers experiences etc have impact.

I've had certain really strong fundamentals since I was pretty little though. And they are stronger/ different flavour/ different to certainly many around me at school etc.

These things feel instinctive. Just. Part of who I am iyswim.

Including-

Feminist (2nd wave meets best but really I just think what I think more or less. I read and have read but a lot is just sort of just how I feel)
Class view rather than individual
Tax and help rather than low tax and two feet (I'm assuming unequal society etc not utopia!)

I was just wondering how others feel?

Just MM in OP apparently going from one end to the other.

NiceGerbil · 04/11/2021 23:57

Reading more.

Whether sex matters/ exists even is not a party political issue. It's an issue for women and girls across the board.

Yet it's constantly pulled back to Tory/ labour.

Why? The lens of left/ right esp with party political specifics is beside the point.

I mean yes. Right- one man property left- all men property. And yes. Traditional role Vs free it all up.

BUT. that's too simplistic. And both refer back to men.

What men want us to be/ behave like.

We exist outside of that and have our own views. We're stuck in the patriarchal system with this.

Women of any and all politics know what men can be like. That sex matters. Know about periods and childbirth and how we are looked at and treated. Women know.

That's what matters to me I think.

IDanielRadcliffe · 05/11/2021 00:00

www.feministcurrent.com/2021/07/02/nine/

This was an interesting read. I remember one of the mothers in Abigail Shriver’s book had similar sentiments regarding this issue shifting her views completely - she no longer believed in Republican vs Democrat, or that the Democrats were “better” - she couldn’t believe the people who were going along with this and that human rights lawyers would be campaigning for men to be in women’s prisons.

LobsterNapkin · 05/11/2021 01:29

@1Week

I really like Mary Harringtons work.

It's a new perspective, to me, anyway. Lots to think about.

She considers a mix of things. One the one hand she traces the feminist movement along materialist lines- its the conditions of life that drive change. Like the much maligned Phyliss Shaffleys remark that the washing machine helped women more than the feminist movement did.
Otoh, she is strong on the emotional and psychological aspects of sex and motherhood. Nothing new to the regulars here but that's the huge missing piece in mainstream Only Gestators culture.

I think she's on here as well, so hi Mary!

Yes, I like that about her, that she really keeps the material element in focus. I find lots of feminist argument can go wrong there, it starts to follow it's ideological nose and ends up in some sort of la la land that just doesn't connect to the physical world and nature. And actually I think that's similar to Murphy and probably why she doesn't want to talk about "patriarchy" - it's very easy when you have these kinds of mental constructs to allow them to operate in your system in a way that just isn't materially grounded. It reminds me of some of the excesses of medieval theology, where a model used to describe something spiritual or about human relations or psychology is followed on through logically to build a whole set of conclusions, but the language model is just not up to that sort of thing.

Sometimes we really need to use models like that to describe real things, but it's important to be very disciplined with it.

LobsterNapkin · 05/11/2021 01:34

That's an argument that doesn't really stack up in a public health system. It's like the whole American right to bear arms thing. It doesn't really stack up in a civilised society. Insisting that your own choices have no impact on wider society is idiotic.

Civil liberties organisations and lawyers would disagree with you. Infringements on people's rights to medical autonomy have to meet certain standards, one being that they address a serious problem, and another being that the measure is actually likely to work, among others.

If vaccine mandates don't really have much effect than they are legally and ethically very questionable. I think Murphy may give less weight than she should to their ability to protect others, but she is right that they seem much less effective that way than had been hoped, and it's not clear that mandates are likely to be effective.

NiceGerbil · 05/11/2021 01:40

Sorry I've skipped vaccine stuff not interested.

The 'rights' to some types of autonomy I can think of are... Self serving and dodgy. Generally around men arguing for things to do with sex.

Anyway.

'Infringements on people's rights to medical autonomy have to meet certain standards, one being that they address a serious problem, and another being that the measure is actually likely to work, among others.'

USA - abortion? I mean that's fucked in loads of States autonomy-wise.

NiceGerbil · 05/11/2021 01:44

I would also say that when it comes to anti vaxx focusing on individuals for me is beside the point.

Why does anti vaxx exist?
Why do loads of people think yep vaccines no good.
Who is pushing it and why?
Why is prevention suspicious but cure later not?

So many questions...

LobsterNapkin · 05/11/2021 01:48

@NiceGerbil

Sorry I've skipped vaccine stuff not interested.

The 'rights' to some types of autonomy I can think of are... Self serving and dodgy. Generally around men arguing for things to do with sex.

Anyway.

'Infringements on people's rights to medical autonomy have to meet certain standards, one being that they address a serious problem, and another being that the measure is actually likely to work, among others.'

USA - abortion? I mean that's fucked in loads of States autonomy-wise.

Rights around medical decision making of all kinds are pretty important.
NiceGerbil · 05/11/2021 01:53

Yeeesss but complex. Very complex.

The impact of missionary types going to various communities and talking bollocks has led to loads of unnecessary deaths.

Smallpox was so so nearly eradicated.

Anti vaxx types often seem very selective in which ones they think are dangerous etc...

NiceGerbil · 05/11/2021 01:55

And with medical decision making in general. Ordinary people just don't have the info. Docs advice is generally followed

What is it about vaccines that freak people out so much? You don't get this with antibiotics or anaesthetic do you.

NiceGerbil · 05/11/2021 01:58

I mean it's a fascinating topic.

I have no strong views on this vaccine.

When it comes to telling communities that vaccine for something super horrible are a conspiracy to make everyone infertile etc. I mean why? What is it about vaccines that makes people so determined to stop them/ and so many hear and think right let's not.

timeisnotaline · 05/11/2021 03:45

@LobsterNapkin

That's an argument that doesn't really stack up in a public health system. It's like the whole American right to bear arms thing. It doesn't really stack up in a civilised society. Insisting that your own choices have no impact on wider society is idiotic.

Civil liberties organisations and lawyers would disagree with you. Infringements on people's rights to medical autonomy have to meet certain standards, one being that they address a serious problem, and another being that the measure is actually likely to work, among others.

If vaccine mandates don't really have much effect than they are legally and ethically very questionable. I think Murphy may give less weight than she should to their ability to protect others, but she is right that they seem much less effective that way than had been hoped, and it's not clear that mandates are likely to be effective.

What is the evidence that mandates are not effective? I’m in oz and nobody can turn up to work at an aged care home without up to date vaccines including flu, and now nobody can step on for work who’s not vaccinated. I cannot go into my office building until I’ve had my second dose. It seems perfectly effective, in ensuring safe environments for vulnerable people, and also in tipping people who weren’t sure over the line to get vaccinated, which has the benefits of flow on transmission reduction as well as less severe incidences, both of which reduce the pressure on hospitals.
NiceGerbil · 05/11/2021 03:50

I suppose a question could be-

If polio or smallpox came back here. And there were a contingent of people, a fair number of people refusing vaccine. Would that be different?

I find that those who are nope to Corona tend to be perfectly happy with those. Apparently it's different.

UsedUpUsername · 05/11/2021 04:02

@MalagaNights

Has anyone listened to this?

She talks about not being a radical feminist, how she no longer uses the term patriarchy, how she's moved from being left wing to now voting conservative and would have voted for Trump over Biden.

She talks about how some feminists are now attacking her.

She's left Canada and moved to Mexico because of her concerns with free speech and authoritarianism.

Anyone else heard this, or resonate with her move away from some femininist ideology and current 'progressive' ideology?

It resonates with me and I think the trans issue has been central in both these respects.

I’ve had a similar Damascus moment, although on a different issue.

I used to vote (in the US ) solely on abortion rights. Now after the medical fascism imposed by the left, I will never vote for them ever again. Or at least—it will take a very long time to trust them. I thought they were the party of personal and bodily freedom, I’ve seen how very wrong I was.

oldwomanwhoruns · 05/11/2021 07:30

I was more concerned with Joe R's attitude to beating Covid - you just have to 'have plenty of exercise and take vitamin tablets' Confused

Tell that to the medical professionals who have died from Covid, mate.

But MM's description of her Twitter bans was chilling - banned for asking 'what is the actual difference between men, and trans-women?'

Such a good question. Because the answer is, obviously, nothing

LobsterNapkin · 05/11/2021 11:43

What is the evidence that mandates are not effective? I’m in oz and nobody can turn up to work at an aged care home without up to date vaccines including flu, and now nobody can step on for work who’s not vaccinated. I cannot go into my office building until I’ve had my second dose. It seems perfectly effective, in ensuring safe environments for vulnerable people, and also in tipping people who weren’t sure over the line to get vaccinated, which has the benefits of flow on transmission reduction as well as less severe incidences, both of which reduce the pressure on hospitals.

What's going on in Australia is a really good example of the dangers in these kinds of mandates.

One of the things I always notice in this is that many people now, especially young ones, seem to have very little awareness of what kinds of balancing are required in public mandates about things like receiving vaccinations or other medical treatments. Whether it's mandated directly or forced by government legislation that says you lose your job, even if you work alone in the woods or on a farm, if you don't do what they want.

There is a very high bar for this kind of thing and in in most countries like the UK, Oz, Canada, the US, has only been possible because of emergency measures mandates. It's notable that Australia is now looking to push through legislation that will give the health minister unprecedented powers to make health orders even when not under a state of emergency.

That is where this stuff is headed. Justifying very authoritarian actions by the state that violate what have been legal principles about things like medical decision making, justified for "the public good".

But as far as this vaccine in particular. People hoped that it would be much more effective in preventing transmission, and therefor by having large numbers of people vaccinated it would really just make the virus rare. This allowed people, in their minds anyway, to justify the idea that the state should use strong measures to force people into getting the vaccine, even though it's such a new drug (new drugs tend to be the ones that will have some unexpected effects which is why many doctors avoid prescribing them until they have been around for a bit, if they can.)

Except that it doesn't. There are a fair number of breakthrough cases and while it reduces transmission, there can still be quite a lot. It also makes it more likely there will be asymptomatic transmission. Diseases that respond best to vaccination are things like smallpox - still the only human disease ever extinguished. They need to have a vaccine that is pretty much completely effective, a very short incubation period, slow rate of mutation, and very obvious symptoms. That is the opposite of covid and similar viruses.

So changes are they it will be with us permanently, unless you want to go total isolationist.

So mandates for vaccination should be weighed against a scenario where you still have covid around, maybe a fair bit. It's not at all clear that the difference between most people choosing to vaccinate in this scenario, and the authoritarian measures required to get everyone vaccinated, will have much effect overall, especially as it also tends to affect people's attitudes negatively.

EmbarrassingHadrosaurus · 05/11/2021 11:52

@NiceGerbil

And with medical decision making in general. Ordinary people just don't have the info. Docs advice is generally followed

What is it about vaccines that freak people out so much? You don't get this with antibiotics or anaesthetic do you.

In the UK it goes back literally hundreds of years including Jenner's first use of it and beyond: opposition to compulsory vaccination is the origin of the concept and term conscientious objecter.
timeisnotaline · 05/11/2021 12:00

Are you aware that we have broad vaccine mandates anyway, and most of us don’t see it as infringing our liberties? All children must be vaccinated to attend school. All staff at aged care facilities must be vaccinated and annually for the flu. I’m completely comfortable with this vaccine also being mandatory and so is nearly everyone I know. It is making a significant difference on hospitalisation rates ie effective.

LobsterNapkin · 05/11/2021 12:16

I would disagree given the level of protesting that's going on in Australia.There are a lot of people who are very concerned about this. And frankly if people are not concerned about legislation giving such concentrated powers to ministers, they should be. It's like people don't read history.

But people may be ok with requirements in a healthcare setting, whereas not so much for everyone in any kind of employment.

People may be ok when there are exemptions for conscientious objection, but not so much when there isn't.

People may be ok with a more established vaccine that's been around for a while, but less sure about a very new one, using new tech.

People may feel differently about mandates for a vaccine that has a significant benefit for an illness that has very high risks, but less so about one that has less significant benefits and for diseases which are not so high risk, or which are really very low risk for some, such as children and teens.

Civil liberties principles are always most difficult when they mean we can't make people do something we might really prefer that they do.

timeisnotaline · 05/11/2021 12:24

Don’t conflate the protests around broad powers with the anti vaccine objectors. Different rationales, and much like brexit the anti vaxx protests had a lot of frustrated drivers as well as being anti the mandate.
The broad powers are pretty concerning and I wouldn’t vote for them, and don’t trust our government with them.

It may be a new vaccine in elements of it but you will have seen on this site alone great explanations of how much simply having funding accelerated the process, so all safety checks were completed. Also, we’ve never ever had this much data on a vaccine, with such huge take up. What we don’t have anywhere near enough data on is long COVID.

Floisme · 05/11/2021 12:28

Are we sure we're all talking about the same Meghan Murphy? I know she's expressed a view on vaccine passports but I've not seen / cannot find anything about her being pregnant or about working in a care home. Of course this might be down to my googling skills and I'm happy to be corrected but I also can't remember her mentioning either in the Joe Rogan interview (plus she practically drank him under the table so um.... Shock)

I also think she's normally pretty circumspect about her personal life having been doxxed and subjected to threats.

The Meghan Murphy I'm thinking of is spelt with an 'h'

timeisnotaline · 05/11/2021 12:43

Umm. The very first links when I looked up Meghan Murphy Canadian vaccine were for a woman who was a care home worker and pregnant, and like pps had said it said she’s not anti vaxx and has had others so it seemed to be the right person, but it does look like it’s a completely different woman (& doesn’t have an h in Megan) @Floisme BlushBlush www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5856370
That is rather embarrassing! Ignore all my comments!! Except those about vaccine mandates particularly in australia Grin But I’m going to slink away now to not derail this any further.

Floisme · 05/11/2021 13:04

Ha ha but please don't go, it's very easily done, and I'm sure the 'real' Meghan Murphy would be the first to applaud you for holding up your hands Grin

LobsterNapkin · 05/11/2021 19:19

@timeisnotaline

Don’t conflate the protests around broad powers with the anti vaccine objectors. Different rationales, and much like brexit the anti vaxx protests had a lot of frustrated drivers as well as being anti the mandate. The broad powers are pretty concerning and I wouldn’t vote for them, and don’t trust our government with them.

It may be a new vaccine in elements of it but you will have seen on this site alone great explanations of how much simply having funding accelerated the process, so all safety checks were completed. Also, we’ve never ever had this much data on a vaccine, with such huge take up. What we don’t have anywhere near enough data on is long COVID.

It's not the testing that is at issue.

Many many drugs and devices go through all the normal testing procedures, but still turn out to have problems. Most of the time these come out in the first year or two. Most of the time these are not totally horrible either, they are contraindications, or side-effects that weren't picked up earlier. Occasionally it's something more serious.

This is totally predictable when you take a new drug and start giving it to huge numbers of people. There will sometimes be things testing didn't pick up. Doctors are aware of it, and this is why many prefer to keep using more well known meds, and only use the new ones when it looks like there will be a significant advantage over old ones. Once there is a little more experience with the medication they are more inclined to prescribe it and switch patients if the new one still seems better.

It's really not crazy or stupid to be wary of really new medications, even under the best possible conditions.

This is another of these instances where the left seems to want to take this very authoritarian approach and dismiss any other position, even quite moderate ones, as morally reprehensible.

Swipe left for the next trending thread